ARUN KUMAR SINGH vs RAILWAY BOARD on 10 November 2026

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PATNA Order Sheet Item no.: 12 O.A./201/2026 (PATNA) [ PROMOTION ] Court No.: 1 No of Adjournment: 6 Order Dated: 10/11/2026 ARUN KUMAR SINGH Vs RAILWAY BOARD

For Applicant(s) Advocate : Ms. S. Singh, proxy counsel for Shri Shekhar Singh.

For Respondent(s) Advocate : Shri T.N. Thakur, ld. Sr. CGSC., Shri G.K. Agarwal, ld. ASC., Shri B.K. Choudhary, l/c for intervener., Shri Sunil Kumar, l/c for intervener. Order of The Tribunal Ms. S. Singh, ld. proxy counsel appearing for Shri Shekhar Singh. Shri T.N. Thakur, ld. Sr. CGSC, Shri G.K. Agarwal, ld. ASC, Shri B.K. Choudhary and Shri Sunil Kumar, l/c for intervener appear for the respondents. M.A. No. 182/2026 and M.A. No. 183/2026 were filed by two sets of interveners for being impleaded as party respondents on the grounds primarily to protect their right. They were apprehensive that they will get adversely affected if this O.A. is allowed. That is why they had done so by opposing the contention of the original applicant who have pleaded for allowing the O.A. These two sets of M.A. were allowed by this Tribunal on 30.06.2026 with direction to the counsel for the applicant to implead the name of these interveners as party respondents in the instant O.A. Looking at the record, we find that that counsel for the applicant has still not amended the memo of parties, though these interveners now were supposed to figure in the array of party respondents. Counsel for the applicant is being directed to follow this direction and bring these amendment accordingly. Proxy counsel for the applicant who is appearing on behalf of the regular counsel has apprised that this matter was pending for constitution of the Full Bench. As per her information which is not being supported by any document at this moment, this Full Bench has already been constituted and the matter is under consideration. Learned counsel for one of the set of intervener, Shri B.K., Choudhary has also pointed out another fact that the decision of the CAT, Jabalpur which was being relied upon by the counsel for the applicant has been subsequently quashed by Hon’ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh. This Tribunal believes that all these factors will be taken into account by the Full Bench while considering this matter. In view of the above factual matrix, there does not appear to be any reason why this Tribunal should wait for the adjudication of this O.A. when the Full Bench is already seized of the same matter. Since, the regular counsel for the applicant is not available today, hence the matter is being adjourned. Let the regular counsel for the appliant appear on the next date and assist the Bench at arriving at the final decision. List the case on 04.12.2026. KUMAR RAJESH CHANDRA Member (A) Justice Narendra Kumar Johari Member (J) Binay Prasad ( ps )